SITARAM PANDA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition has been filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C against the order dtd. 9/1/2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/ I/FTSC (POCSO), Bilaspur in Special Criminal Case No. (POCSO ACT)/49/2022, whereby the application filed by the Petitioner under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C for recalling 3 witnesses for re-cross-examination has been dismissed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that FIR has been registered against the Petitioner at PS Sirgitti, Bilaspur on 23/2/2022 with an averment that he has sexually exploited a minor girl during the period commencing from 7/2/2018 to 30/7/2021, therefore, offence under Sec. 376 IPC as also under Ss. 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act has been registered against him. During trial, the prosecution has examined 3 witnesses namely Dipti Chhatterjee, Niyati Agrawal and Mamta Tiwari, who are the Officers of Government Children's Home, Bilaspur. During pendency of the trial, FSL report has been received wherein, stains of semen were found owing to which, the Petitioner has filed an application for re-cross-examination of the said 3 witnesses, which has been dismissed by the order impugned.

(3.) Shri Gandhi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the impugned order is bad in law as the FSL report has been received on 26/9/2022 but the prosecution witnesses i.e. Dipti Chhatterjee has been examined on 6/6/2022 and Niyati Agrawal and Mamta Tiwari have been examined on 6/7/2022 and the Counsel engaged therein also not examined the FSL report, therefore, for just decision of the case, the said application ought to have been allowed. He placed reliance on the judgment rendered in the matter of V.N. Patil vs. K. Niranjan Kumar and Others reported in (2021) 3 SCC 661 as also on Pidika Sambaru v. State of Odisha, (Orissa), in Criminal Revision No.490/2021 dtd. 4/3/2022.